Walz says he ‘speaks like everybody else.’ And it’s not working for the campaign.

I just don’t think the VP makes that much difference, unless they are very popular in a swing state or Sarah Palin level bad. I don’t think anybody goes and votes for Harris because Walz has a military record.

 

I would agree with you, with the exception that there are some people that are not overly enthusiastic about either candidate, and little details like this could make a difference, if the V.P. provides something that the main candidate does not have. And with the prospect of potential war with either Russia or China looming over the election, it would be helpful if someone on either ticket had military leadership experience. Vance does not have military leadership experience--he never rose above corporal, while Walz was a command sergeant major. Trump dodged military duty, and Harris never served. Someone without military leadership experience might get in over their head using the military in a situation where it was not needed (or could not succeed), or not using the military where it was needed, or failing to make use of fighting a proxy war. JFK, LBJ, GWB, Obama, and Trump all misused the military in some way.

 

Vance is more relevant simply because Trump is so old. He’s already older than the average American male lifespan. So the odds that Vance might have to step in are significantly higher than with Walz.

The Vance Thiel connection is deeply disturbing. Major major downside with Vance.

 

No need to repeat myself. You proved my point.

 

You are correct. Walk does have military experience but due to his penchant to “misspeak”, not sure that is something he wants to continually bring up. When you get caught in two flat out lies regarding your rank achieved and whether or not you carried guns in war, it might be better for Walz to avoid the subject going forward.